Hardware Mig Switch on Switch 2

[Locutus73]

I asked the guy on YT and he realized he used his legit copy of Link's Awakening on his Switch 2 while the same game was loaded in his MIG Flash in his docked Switch 1... two istances of the same cart Id at the same time... honestly I'd expect his Switch 1 to be banned too.

...and the video is private now...

 

[Reecey2]

How old are you to believe this? I repeat, these changes are made for Nintendo's legal protection. There will never be any real console blocking. There will only be bans, as always.

Ergh… I’m afraid to say you had to agree too these new terms and conditions though your Nintendo account so yes they will ban the units fully

 

[AshWeststar]

They are unnecessarily crippling the Switch 2 functionality, there's no way around that.

As mentioned previously, under EU consumer laws, such as the Digital Content Directive and the Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Nintendo can terminate service agreements for significant breaches, including piracy. This includes revoking access to future updates but not disabling already installed software. Thus, losing access to future updates is a fair outcome, not an unfair crippling of functionality, as it's tied to the actions breaching the terms. The claim that the ban unnecessarily cripples functionality may not hold if the feature remains usable after the ban.

To elaborate, I have two examples below.

Scenario 1: The user downloads an update, unlocking the MicroSD Express slot before the console is banned. Post-ban, they lose access to the slot despite it not requiring online services to operate.

This could be seen as an unfair violation of the DCD, as this slot does not require continued online access to be usable.

Scenario 2: The console is banned before the user can download the update, preventing them from unlocking the slot.

If the ban prevents downloading the update before it's installed, the user cannot unlock the MicroSD Express slot. However, this is a consequence of the ban, which is triggered by a significant breach, such as piracy. Under the DCD, Nintendo's obligation to provide updates terminates upon contract termination due to breach. The UCTD requires termination clauses to be fair, and the previously linked study on digital services indicates that termination for significant breaches, such as piracy, is generally permissible if it is transparent and justified. Given that the violation undermines service integrity, preventing access to future updates, including feature-unlocking ones, is likely viewed as a proportionate response and not unfair.

I am unsure which scenario you're suggesting Nintendo is doing, but this is my understanding of the legal implications. Keep me honest here; my understanding currently is that scenario 2 is the current situation and if they were banned after unlocking the slot, the slot wouldn't be locked?

Edit: Corrected mention to say DCD instead of UCTD in Scenario 1.

 

[Madblaster6]

So here is some news. My switch that I had originally tried the Mig on a few days ago in this forum is banned. The interesting part is that I returned it to factory state the next day and gave it to my sister. She told me it was banned yesterday. No big deal, I'm getting her a replacement. My current Switch is using the Mig Switch with no bans, and it's only used one on firmware 1.2.0. I'll report back if it gets banned.

 

[der:Tom]

Are we sure that the SD card update can´t be downloaded on banned consoles?
System update seems to still work on banned consoles and that was/is also possible on banned switch 1.

I think Nintendo knows exactly what they are doing and what they can do without conflicting with local laws, why would they let us keep the option to update fw on banned switches?

 

[DiscostewSM]

Even if all you're doing is dumping your own games to use with the cart, you're using an unofficial product that is not guaranteed to be clean (and the dumps themselves may not be clean either). It wasn't really a problem on Switch 1 because there wasn't a means to detect it afaik, but with Switch 2, it can. The folks at MIGSwitch should have investigated further on whether their product was truly acting like a Switch 1 cart instead of stopping when it got it working on the old Switch.

 

[dovahkiing]

So here is some news. My switch that I had originally tried the Mig on a few days ago in this forum is banned. The interesting part is that I returned it to factory state the next day and gave it to my sister. She told me it was banned yesterday. No big deal, I'm getting her a replacement. My current Switch is using the Mig Switch with no bans, and it's only used one on firmware 1.2.0. I'll report back if it gets banned.

I wonder if it is possible all the bans so far are from the error generated in the console prior to firmware 1.2 of the Mig, and if the firmware update that enabled compatibility also removed Nintendos ability to detect it.

 

[linuxares]

I wonder if it is possible all the bans so far are from the error generated in the console prior to firmware 1.2 of the Mig, and if the firmware update that enabled compatibility also removed Nintendos ability to detect it.

That would be interesting. But sounds a bit to good to be true.

 

[der:Tom]

Even if all you're doing is dumping your own games to use with the cart, you're using an unofficial product that is not guaranteed to be clean (and the dumps themselves may not be clean either). It wasn't really a problem on Switch 1 because there wasn't a means to detect it afaik, but with Switch 2, it can. The folks at MIGSwitch should have investigated further on whether their product was truly acting like a Switch 1 cart instead of stopping when it got it working on the old Switch.

I don´t even think they (MIG) would have told people if they knew from day1 that you´ll get banned, they want to sell as much as they can as long as they can (imo Nintendo will eventually crack down on them and sue their a*sses).

 

[apologeta62]

So whats all about the MIG? As I understand, you can only use your own (or downloaded) dumped games and when the game gets an update or dlc, you have to go online and get banned? Sorry but as a newbie i dont get it.

 

[linuxares]

So whats all about the MIG? As I understand, you can only use your own (or downloaded) dumped games and when the game gets an update or dlc, you have to go online and get banned? Sorry but as a newbie i dont get it.

Currently on the Switch 2. If you use it, you get banned. That's all info we got currently.

 

[apologeta62]

Currently on the Switch 2. If you use it, you get banned. That's all info we got currently.

Ah okay, so on Switch 1 you can go online and update games + purchase dlc without any risk to get banned?

 

[RyanTheArchivist]

Ah okay, so on Switch 1 you can go online and update games + purchase dlc without any risk to get banned?

We don't know. You could in the past but with the latest firmware we can't be certain.

 

[Inaki]

As mentioned previously, under EU consumer laws, such as the Digital Content Directive and the Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Nintendo can terminate service agreements for significant breaches, including piracy. This includes revoking access to future updates but not disabling already installed software. Thus, losing access to future updates is a fair outcome, not an unfair crippling of functionality, as it's tied to the actions breaching the terms. The claim that the ban unnecessarily cripples functionality may not hold if the feature remains usable after the ban.

To elaborate, I have two examples below.

Scenario 1: The user downloads an update, unlocking the MicroSD Express slot before the console is banned. Post-ban, they lose access to the slot despite it not requiring online services to operate.

This could be seen as an unfair violation of the DCD, as this slot does not require continued online access to be usable.

Scenario 2: The console is banned before the user can download the update, preventing them from unlocking the slot.

If the ban prevents downloading the update before it's installed, the user cannot unlock the MicroSD Express slot. However, this is a consequence of the ban, which is triggered by a significant breach, such as piracy. Under the DCD, Nintendo's obligation to provide updates terminates upon contract termination due to breach. The UCTD requires termination clauses to be fair, and the previously linked study on digital services indicates that termination for significant breaches, such as piracy, is generally permissible if it is transparent and justified. Given that the violation undermines service integrity, preventing access to future updates, including feature-unlocking ones, is likely viewed as a proportionate response and not unfair.

I am unsure which scenario you're suggesting Nintendo is doing, but this is my understanding of the legal implications. Keep me honest here; my understanding currently is that scenario 2 is the current situation and if they were banned after unlocking the slot, the slot wouldn't be locked?

Edit: Corrected mention to say DCD instead of UCTD in Scenario 1.

There's a lot of interpretation here, I'd say. Again, as I explained in my initial post with this, stopping you from getting new games, keycard based games or updates helps nothing on nintendo's side ( banning online PLAY does ). Besides, there's no piracy necessarily, so...

 

[xtrem3x]

I wonder if Nintendo have been able to detect the MIG all along but did nothing because the Switch was near EOL and wanted to wait for Switch 2 to punish people

 

[Inaki]

I wonder if Nintendo have been able to detect the MIG all along but did nothing because the Switch was near EOL and wanted to wait for Switch 2 to punish people

If nintendo had done what it knows at a switch 1 level, which we have full control of and we can reverse engineer, they would have given us the information we need to see how they detect. I still think they do get the needed info but just send telemetry, so to say. We could still try to reverse engineer the logs or whatever and maybe see what the gathered data is, but without actually having a rejection of the MiG cart in place it is way more difficult to focus on the actual checks, etc. and to determine the place(s) where we should be looking into.

 

[linuxares]

I wonder if Nintendo have been able to detect the MIG all along but did nothing because the Switch was near EOL and wanted to wait for Switch 2 to punish people

fully possible. It's not EOL yet, but they aren't focusing on it.

 

[dovahkiing]

That would be interesting. But sounds a bit to good to be true.

Agreed. I'm just trying to fit the data.

The main questions for folks who've used the MiG on the Switch 2 seem (to me) to be:

1. Did you launch a backed up game from the MiG Flash on cart firmware prior to 1.2, triggering the error message that the cartridge cannot be read?

2. Did you launch a backed up game after updating MiG to 1.2?

3. If yes to #2, did you interact with online services *while* running the game off the MiG? Or were you in airplane mode.

4. Is your console banned?

For banned user reports so far, as far as I can tell it seems like:
1. Yes
2. Reports mixed
3. Reports mixed
4. Yes

Hence, my thought that it may be the error itself in #1 getting logged and reported to Nintendo that triggers the bans.

*edited for clarity

 

[Shadow_The_Hedgehog82]

Agreed. I'm just trying to fit the data.

The main questions for folks who've used the MiG on the Switch 2 seem (to me) to be:

1. Did you launch a backed up game from the MiG Flash on cart firmware prior to 1.2, triggering the error message that the cartridge cannot be read?

2. Did you launch a backed up game after updating MiG to 1.2?

3. If yes to #2, did you interact with online services *while* running the game off the MiG? Or were you in airplane mode.

4. Is your console banned?

For banned user reports so far, as far as I can tell it seems like:
1. Yes
2. Reports diverge
3. Reports diverge
4. Yes

Hence, my thought that it may be the error itself in #1 getting logged and reported to Nintendo that triggers the bans.

yeah im thinking its probably due to the error aswell due to lack of bans on switch 1 bans take like 5 days to happen this is all pretty quick

 

[Locutus73]

So here is some news. My switch that I had originally tried the Mig on a few days ago in this forum is banned. The interesting part is that I returned it to factory state the next day and gave it to my sister. She told me it was banned yesterday. No big deal, I'm getting her a replacement. My current Switch is using the Mig Switch with no bans, and it's only used one on firmware 1.2.0. I'll report back if it gets banned.

Every time you say Switch (the one you gave to your sister and your current one) do you mean Switch 2?